Tuesday, August 28, 2007

An Idaho Senator has been fined for ''lewd behavior'' in a Minneapolis restroom. Since he's a Republican, I'm guessing that Democrats will snicker about the ''hypocrisy'' of the ''family values party'' for a few days. I wonder how they would react if it was a Democrat busted for ''lewd behavior''. Or if they think that ideological purity is a better way to live one's life than the sort of benign hypocrisy that we all engage in.

Besides, the article leaves a lot of questions open about that ''lewd behavior''. I mean, I've never ''cruised'', so I can't exactly say what's normal. But I always imagined that it was like in the movies- guys in leather, glory holes, ''lips or hips?", that sort of thing. Nope. The Senator says that what he was busted for was standing too close to a stall so that his foot was under the door and his briefcase was against the door. A bit rude, sure. But that's ''lewd''?

And, incredibly, the cop remembers it basically the same way. He was on ''stakeout'' sitting on a toilet, and a foot comes under the door. Apparently, this is the universal sign for, ''lips or hips?" So, he busts the guy for standing too close to the stall door! This is the hot man-on-man action we're talking about- a foot strays under a stall door! Book 'em Dano.

Look, I'm not even sure I understand staking out public toilets. If someone is hanging around toilets propositioning children, I can see where that's a serious problem and you'd want the police involved. But, why exactly can't grown men turn down offers of sex without running to the police like crybabies? I mean, sure, if I want to use the toilet, I don't want to have to run a Village People gauntlet to get there, but you know what- I'm actually able to turn down sexual propositions without it warping my fragile little mind.

So, I don't exactly see the point of stakeouts. But, even for those people who think that we desperately need to keep our public places homorein, doesn't the idea of a cop hanging out in a public restroom waiting to arrest anyone whose foot gets too close to the door sound a little bit like a waste of time and money? Seriously.

2 comments:

So, I don't exactly see the point of stakeouts. But, even for those people who think that we desperately need to keep our public places homorein, doesn't the idea of a cop hanging out in a public restroom waiting to arrest anyone whose foot gets too close to the door sound a little bit like a waste of time and money? Seriously.

It's a public nuisance deal; the police get complaints from citizens that a spot is turning into a 'location for lewdness'. If this is against the law, the vice detail is assigned to the area to cut down the rowdiness.

After a while word gets around and the activity at that spot drops off.

It isn't so very different that the cops driving through a public park at night to enforce underage curfews or anything else that falls under the heading of 'spoiling people's fun'.

The laws are on the books, people want them enforced so enforced they are.

Ah, so it isn't so much the soliciting as people walking in on two people having sex. I can see where that's a nuisance. It's happened to me a few times- once indeed in a public restroom with very low stalls- and it basically amused me more than anything, but I can see where it's an issue. It seems to me like what would reasonably happen though is the Innocent Bystander would say 'Hey, can you please knock it off?' and that would likely do the trick. If not, they could get the cops to break it up. I still think it's much ado about nothing. But I do assume that there are a lot of laws that police enforce because the public demands it.